Quarantine state

From
Eric Kvaalen

Your position against banning travellers arriving from the three countries affected by the Ebola outbreak is well intentioned, but I don’t think it is realistic (25 October, p 3). You compare an entry ban to that imposed by the US in 1987 on people who were HIV positive, but Ebola isn’t the same as HIV. It is much more contagious, and if we aren’t careful it could become pandemic.

If the Ebola outbreak becomes pandemic, it could be very difficult to protect yourself, which isn’t the case with HIV. We don’t have any way to detect carriers of Ebola at present, and so we can’t take the risk of allowing it to slip in. We have to protect ourselves now.

The reduction in flights after the terrorist attacks on the US World Trade Center in 2001 delayed the flu season. This shows that reducing flights can work.

It is true that a travel ban will make things worse in the affected countries, but this disease is going to cause great disruption anyway. We must not sacrifice the rest of the world in a vain effort to mitigate the disaster there.Les Essarts-le-Roi, France